>In article <94008.150249FORSDYKE at QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <FORSDYKE at QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
>writes:
>> The prevailing view, as far as I am aware, is that making multiple
>> simultaneous submissions is unethical. My posting implies that this
>> should really depend on the INTENT of the author.
>> How are we, as a community, to determine the intent of someone
>cheating (there's no other word for it) in this way?
As pointed out previously, if one double-publishes and cites both
publications in one's grant or tenure application, then there is a clear
intent to deceive one's peers.
>>If he/she is really just
>> trying to get a paper published expeditiously, then I do not think the
>ORI
>> should be concerned.
>> Most journals have mechanisms for accelerating publication of
>unusually important results. Some journals even exist for the sole
>purpose of getting important results to press rapidly. That's the
> Marc R. Roussel
>mroussel at alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca
You may have missed the earlier correspondence on this matter.
The purpose of the rapid publication was to make sure that one's work
was published/accepted prior to some critical grant or tenure-decision
deadline. In these days of rising cut-off points one paper more might
make all the difference between success or failure. One laggardly
reviewer could disasterously influence an author's career. There are
numerous ways this could be corrected, but I, for one, would not think
badly about someone who makes multiple submissions pending general system
reform.
Sincerely, Don Forsdyke